The Wall Street Journal reported Saturday that Army Chief of Staff General Ray Odierno has called for a reevaluation of scheduled cuts in the Army:
“The Army's highest-ranking officer on Friday said the rapid spread of threats around the world and growing demands on the U.S. military should prompt a review of deep cuts scheduled in the size of America's ground forces.
Gen. Ray Odierno, the Army chief of staff, said he had ‘grave concern about the size of the military,’ particularly in light of a wave of new international problems, including Russian aggression in Europe, the rise of militancy in Iraq and the Ebola threat in Africa.
‘Threats are increasing – they aren't decreasing – and we have to make sure we are making the right decisions,’ Gen. Odierno said. …
The active-duty Army still has 510,000 service members. But the Army is due to shrink to 490,000 by the end of next year. Pentagon leaders are planning to cut the Army further, to 450,000 by the end of 2017 and potentially to 420,000 by the end of the decade.”
I couldn’t agree more. The cuts in the Army are a result of the lock-step application of the sequester rules. President Obama won’t revisit Defense Department cuts (assuming he even wants to) unless Republicans agree to more spending throughout the government. Republicans have been willing to allow the defense cuts to happen to avoid spending increases elsewhere in government.
Both sides need to back off on further defense cuts, but I think the President is less likely to do so. In my opinion, defense comes first, as in “provide for the common defence.” But even if a majority of Republicans were willing to make an exception to the sequester rules for defense, I don’t see the President and enough Democrats agreeing, unless they get to spend more in other areas.
I understand that the number of troops we are sending to Iraq (so far) and to Africa (to fight Ebola) are not large and that it’s unclear how long those commitments will last. Vladimir Putin’s Russia, however, is different. President Obama spoke forcefully in Estonia about NATO defending its members. The speech was good. But more important than talk is action. If we really want Vladimir Putin to pay attention, and stop invading his neighbors, we need to review the planned cuts to the Army. Why should President Putin believe our tough talk about defending our allies when we keep cutting defense spending and the size of our armed forces?
But it’s not just Vladimir Putin. Our Army and our military need to be big enough and strong enough not just to handle the crises we can anticipate. They need to be able to handle the ones we can’t anticipate, too. Because it’s the crises we don’t see coming that are often the most dangerous.
Comments